T.N. SEMENOVA¹, V.N. GRIGORYEVA¹, E.V. GUZANOVA^{1, 2}

 ¹Privolzhskiy Research Medical University of the MOH Russia, Nizhny Novgorod

²Nizhny Novgorod Regional Clinical Hospital named after N.A. Semashko, Nizhny Novgorod

 Contact details:

Semenova T.N. — postgraduate student of the Department of Neurological Diseases

Address: 10/1 Minin and Pozharsky Square, Nizhny Novgorod, Russian Federation, 603005, tel.: +7 (831) 438-95-67, e-mail: neurotmdoc@gmail.com

 The purpose of this study was to evaluate impact of cognitive impairments on the upper limb function recovery after acute lacunar stroke (LS).

Material and methods. 139 patients (aged from 35 to 80 y. o.) with acute LS were examined. Along with the clinical and neurological examination, an upper limb function was evaluated by Action Research Arm Test and 9-Hole Peg Test, a study of cognitive status was made using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (МоСа) and Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB).

Results. Impaired upper limb function was revealed in 79% of patients with LS. After 2 weeks of acute period of LS, a significant improvement or the complete recovery of the upper limb function was observed in 81%. Moderate/severe executive dysfunction (FAB ≤ 15 points) was defined in 65% of patients with LS and upper limb dysfunction. Moderate/severe cognitive impairments (МоСа < 26 points) were revealed in almost 55% of patients.

In acute period of LS, the negative prognostic factor for complete recovery or significant improvement of the arm function was the presence of moderate/severe executive dysfunction (OR 3.89; 95% CI 1.07–14.19; p = 0.04) and general cognitive deficit (OR 3.27; 95% CI 1.10–9.70; p = 0.03).

Conclusions. Cognitive impairments including executive disorders may affect the upper limb function recovery in acute period of LS. The data obtained can be used for the development of personalized rehabilitation programs for these patients.

Key words: arm and hand dysfunction, recovery of the upper limb, lacunar stroke, executive dysfunction, cognitive deficit.

REFERENCES

1. Persson H.C., Parziali M., Danielsson A. et al. Outcome and upper extremity function within 72 hours after first occasion of stroke in an unselected population at a stroke unit: a part of the SALGOT study. BMC Neurol, 2012, vol. 12, pp. 162.
2. Murphy M.A., Resteghini C., Feys P. et al. An overview of systematic reviews on upper extremity outcome measures after stroke. BMC Neurol, 2015, vol. 15, p. 29.
3. Mok V., Wong A., Lam W. et al. Cognitive impairment and functional outcome after stroke associated with small vessel disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry, 2004, vol. 75 (4), pp. 560–566.
4. Mullick A.A., Subramanian S.K., Levin M.F. Emerging evidence of the association between cognitive deficits and arm motor recovery after stroke: A meta-analysis. Restor Neurol Neurosci, 2015, vol. 33 (3), pp. 389–403. DOI: 10.3233/RNN-150510
5. Hoonhorst M.H., Nijland R.H., Berg J.S. et al. How Do Fugl-Meyer Arm Motor Scores Relate to Dexterity According to the Action Research Arm Test at 6 Months Poststroke? Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 2015, vol. 96 (10), pp. 1845–1849.
6. Mitchell A., Le V., Muniz S. et al. Adult Norms for a Commercially Available Nine Hole Peg Test for Finger Dexterity. Am J Occup Ther, 2010, vol. 57, pp. 570–573.
7. Bertoni R., Lamers I., Chen C.C. et al. Unilateral and bilateral upper limb dysfunction at body functions, activity and participation levels in people with multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler, 2015, vol. 21, pp. 1566–1574. DOI: 10.1177/1352458514567553
8. Van der Lee J.H., De Groot V., Beckerman H. et al. The intra- and interrater reliability of the action research arm test: a practical test of upper extremity function in patients with stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 2002, vol. 16, pp. 646–653. DOI: 10.1053/apmr.2001.18668
9. Bosma L.V., Kragt J.J., Brieva L. et al. Progression on the multiple sclerosis functional composite in multiple sclerosis: What is the optimal cut-off for the three components? Mult Scler, 2010, vol. 16, pp. 862–867.
10. Hayward K.S., Kramer S.F., Thijs V. et al. A systematic review protocol of timing, efficacy and cost effectiveness of upper limb therapy for motor recovery post-stroke. Syst Rev, 2019, vol. 8 (1), p. 187.
11. Coupar F., Pollock A., Rowe P. et al. Predictors of upper limb recovery after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Rehabil, 2012, vol. 26 (4), pp. 291–313. DOI: 10.1177/0269215511420305
12. Platz T., Denzler P. Do psychological variables modify motor recovery among patients with mild arm paresis after stroke or traumatic brain injury who receives the Arm Ability Training? Restor Neurol Neurosci, 2002, vol. 20 (1), pp. 37–49.
13. Mark V.W., Woods A.J., Mennemeier M. et al. Cognitive assessment for CI therapy in the outpatient clinic. Neuro Rehabilitation, 2006, vol. 21, pp. 139–146.
14. Skidmore E.R., Becker J.T., Whyte E.M. et al. Cognitive Impairments and Depressive Symptoms Did Not Impede Upper Extremity Recovery in a Clinical Repetitive Task Practice Program after Stroke: A Pilot Study. Am J Phys Med Rehabil, 2012, vol. 91 (4), pp. 327–336.
15. Boe E.W., Pedersen A.D., Pedersen A.R. et al. Cognitive status does not predict motor gain from post stroke constraint-induced movement therapy. Neuro Rehabilitation, 2014, vol. 34 (1), pp. 201–207. DOI: 10.3233/nre-131011
16. Barreca S.R., Finlayson A.M., Gowland C.A., Basmajian J.V. Use of the Halstead Category Test as a cognitive predictor of functional recovery in the hemiplegic upper limb: A cross-validation study. Clin Neuropsychol, 1999, vol. 13 (2), pp. 171–181. DOI: 10.1076/clin.13.2.171.1969
17. Dancause N., Ptito A., Levin M.F. Error correction strategies for motor behavior after unilateral brain damage: Short-term motor learning processes. Neuropsychologia, 2002, vol. 40 (8), pp. 1313–1323.
18. Cirstea C.M., Ptito A., Levin M.F. Feedback and cognition in arm motor skill reacquisition after stroke. Stroke, 2006, vol. 37 (5), pp. 1237–1242. DOI: 10.1161/01.STR.0000217417.89347.63
19. Feys H., Hetebrij J., Wilms G. et al. Predicting arm recovery following stroke: value of site of lesion. Acta Neurol Scand, 2000, vol. 102, pp. 371–377. DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0404.2000.102006371.x
20. Del Bene A., Palumbo V., Lamassa M. et al. Progressive lacunar stroke: review of mechanisms, prognostic features, and putative treatments. Int J Stroke, 2012, vol. 7, pp. 321–329.
21. Ganesh A., Gutnikov S.A., Rothwell P.M. et al. Late functional improvement after lacunar stroke: a population-based study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry, 2018, vol. 89, pp. 1301–1307.
22. Mantero V., Scaccabarozzi C., Botto E. et al. Outcome in lacunar stroke: A cohort study. Acta Neurol Scand, 2018, vol. 138 (4), pp. 320–326. DOI: 10.1111/ane.12961
23. Semenova T.N., Grigor’eva V.N., Novosadova O.A. Hand dysfunction and its recovery in the acute period of lacunar ischemic stroke. Saratovskiy nauchno-meditsinskiy zhurnal, 2020, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 380–383 (in Russ.).
24. Bernhardt J., Godecke E., Johnson L., Langhorne P. Early rehabilitation after stroke. Curr Opin Neurol, 2017, vol. 30 (1), pp. 48–54.
25. Nakayama H., Jorgensen H.S., Raaschou H.O. et al. Recovery of upper extremity function in stroke patients: the Copenhagen Stroke Study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 1994, vol. 75 (4), pp. 394–398.
26. Chung C.S.Y., Pollock A., Campbell T. et al. Cognitive rehabilitation for executive dysfunction in adults with stroke or other adult non-progressive acquired brain damage. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2013, vol. 4, no. CD008391. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008391.pub2
27. Zakharov V.V., Vakhnina N.V. Diagnostics and treatment of chronic cerebral ischemia (clinical analysis). Meditsinskiy Sovet, 2018, no. 18, pp. 44–49 (in Russ.).
28. Rothrock J.F., Clark W.M., Lyden P.D. Spontaneous early improvement following ischemic stroke. Stroke, 1995, vol. 26 (8), pp. 1358–1360.